- #Adlock archive of our on install
- #Adlock archive of our on download
- #Adlock archive of our on windows
Sun Aug 21 23:56:54 2016 user.notice adblock info : => processing source 'yoyo' Sun Aug 21 23:56:53 2016 user.notice adblock info : domain merging finished
#Adlock archive of our on download
Sun Aug 21 23:56:53 2016 user.notice adblock info : source download finished (5695 entries) Sun Aug 21 23:56:51 2016 user.notice adblock info : => processing source 'disconnect' Sun Aug 21 23:56:51 2016 user.notice adblock info : domain merging finished Sun Aug 21 23:56:50 2016 user.notice adblock info : source download finished (410 entries) Sun Aug 21 23:56:50 2016 user.notice adblock info : => processing source 'adaway' Sun Aug 21 23:56:50 2016 user.notice adblock info : created volatile uhttpd instances Sun Aug 21 23:56:50 2016 user.notice adblock info : created volatile firewall rulesets Sun Aug 21 23:56:49 2016 user.notice adblock info : backup/restore will be disabled Sun Aug 21 23:56:49 2016 user.notice adblock info : AP mode enabled
![adlock archive of our on adlock archive of our on](https://64.media.tumblr.com/a830e8efbe9400eabccee1cc6aab30a0/tumblr_n8s3ttlAno1svnesco5_1280.jpg)
And you're right, blocking on router level is more "digital".
#Adlock archive of our on windows
Unlike its use in a browser plugin such as ublock origin which generates a warning preload page with options, blocking at the router level will result in a blank page with no explanation.Īt the end it's a personal trade-off for every list, i.e I'm using without any whitelisting (I have no windows mobile) while others put "" on their whitelist, too. I am simply not a fan of overly aggressive block lists. Given the trend, I find it hard to believe these are the only examples of false positives. One would be the site which, while not being an exemplary website in and of itself, contains profiles of device specs not found on competitor sites (such as gsmarena) and having access blocked is inconvenient. How much more could they possibly be tracking than Google does? Or is the block acceptable because they are a far lesser known mapping service.Īs for other examples, I've run into at least two others myself, though have forgotten one as this was months ago. Is it so bad that access to the entire service must be denied? Clearly it is an issue if the user above is trying to make a partial whitelist but is limited in doing so. I'd suggest disabling it as a default list and enabling something like spam404 instead.Įxamples for false positives? is probably on the list due to their extensive client activity tracking. 've noticed that the disconnect list has a number of false positives. * opkg_conf_write_status_files: Can't open status file //usr/lib/opkg/status: Directory not empty.
#Adlock archive of our on install
* opkg_install_cmd: Cannot install package adblock. * opkg_install_pkg: Failed to extract data files for adblock.
![adlock archive of our on adlock archive of our on](http://dailyutahchronicle.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/adblock_plus_2014_logo.svg.png)
* pkg_write_filelist: Failed to open //usr/lib/opkg/info/adblock.list: Directory not empty. * set_flags_from_control: Failed to open //usr/lib/opkg/info/ntrol: No such file or directory. * wfopen: /usr/bin/adblock-update.sh: Directory not empty. * wfopen: /usr/bin/adblock-helper.sh: Directory not empty. * wfopen: //usr/lib/opkg/info/adblock.prerm: Directory not empty. * wfopen: //usr/lib/opkg/info/adblock.postinst: Directory not empty. * wfopen: //usr/lib/opkg/info/ntrol: Directory not empty.
![adlock archive of our on adlock archive of our on](https://64.media.tumblr.com/3bd95d0f2fbd201da5ba31146d951980/d5a234bb890e8034-d0/s400x600/b698ea966ea503932ca89345a1dafb203d8ba3b3.jpg)
* wfopen: //usr/lib/opkg/info/nffiles: Directory not empty. I have tried to install adblock 1.4.0 on my router (15.05.1), but receive following errors: more to come after my holidays - have a good time! I've released 1.4.0 yesterday and it should quite stable now.